Over the past 50 years, however, that balance has shifted. Largely thanks to the entertainment industry’s lawyers and lobbyists, copyright’s scope and duration have vastly increased. In America, copyright holders get 95 years’ protection as a result of an extension granted in 1998, derided by critics as the “Mickey Mouse Protection Act”. They are now calling for even greater protection, and there have been efforts to introduce similar terms in Europe. Such arguments should be resisted: it is time to tip the balance back.

The Take-away

It’s a brief but well-written article that lays out simple and hard-to-contest problems with the current copyright situation.

Not only is it encouraging to see a publication like The Economist discussing the issue, but take a look at the comments – nearly everyone acknowledges there are major problems with the current system.

The point of this is that these people are not hippies, zealots or communists. They aren’t gathering around The Economist to let their Freak Flag Fly. These are normal, rational and concerned people.

The Effect

I suspect that such popular (and rational) opposition to excessive copyright terms, protection and enforcement is a major reason why abominations such as ACTA must operate hidden and behind closed doors. It has become increasingly difficult for corporate interests to publicly shape copyright law in their favor, because it is so out of balance there is no acceptable justification for it.

Of course, instead of seeking out a reasonable balance through public discourse, the choice is to forge ahead in secrecy and refuse to inform the public on what they are doing.

If The Economist and people in general think that copyright laws and enforcement are out-of-whack now, having been developed in the open, imagine how insane they will be when the only entities allowed to even participate in shaping them are organizations like the RIAA and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.